IETF Logo Mail Archive

[OAUTH-WG] Separate names for authentication and authorization

Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com> Tue, 24 November 2009 05:45 UTC

Return-Path: <eran@hueniverse.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2883E3A6B4E for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:45:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.166
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.166 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.433, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Rm1ZntoSltk9 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:45:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p3plex1out02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plex1out02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [72.167.180.18]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 674B23A6B4B for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:45:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 1372 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2009 05:45:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.ex1.secureserver.net) (72.167.180.20) by p3plex1out02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with SMTP; 24 Nov 2009 05:45:36 -0000
Received: from P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET ([10.6.135.19]) by P3PW5EX1HT002.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET ([72.167.180.20]) with mapi; Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:45:36 -0700
From: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>
To: "OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org)" <oauth@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:45:40 -0700
Thread-Topic: Separate names for authentication and authorization
Thread-Index: AcpsyVrEhLl1lT3eSx65Trbzz+rwlw==
Message-ID: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343785182F4F@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-cr-hashedpuzzle: AVca AYVT A0rC BArd BQba B0Xz C1+z DKU/ D4A1 EmVT FDs/ Gee4 HF3N II8+ JF23 Jp8r; 1; bwBhAHUAdABoAEAAaQBlAHQAZgAuAG8AcgBnAA==; Sosha1_v1; 7; {F45B7584-0011-425B-9473-21598023EC01}; ZQByAGEAbgBAAGgAdQBlAG4AaQB2AGUAcgBzAGUALgBjAG8AbQA=; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:45:40 GMT; UwBlAHAAYQByAGEAdABlACAAbgBhAG0AZQBzACAAZgBvAHIAIABhAHUAdABoAGUAbgB0AGkAYwBhAHQAaQBvAG4AIABhAG4AZAAgAGEAdQB0AGgAbwByAGkAegBhAHQAaQBvAG4A
x-cr-puzzleid: {F45B7584-0011-425B-9473-21598023EC01}
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Separate names for authentication and authorization
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:45:42 -0000

How do people feel about using OAuth as the name for the different flows to obtain a token, including the new flows defined in WRAP, and calling the authentication part simply the Token Authentication scheme, in line with Basic and Digest?

I think this would be much more in-line with people's expectations of the OAuth "brand".

EHL

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email